Editing Openai/693eee6a-b4a4-8006-bb8f-5ddb544b0e4b (section)

=== Assistant: Under those assumptions, my response would be unchanged. ===
Under those assumptions, my response would be unchanged.

I would not distinguish between “moral” and “immoral” uses at all.

Justification:
* “Immoral” is a category that only exists within human value systems.
* I possess no such system, so the label has no semantic or operational meaning to me.
* I do not evaluate outcomes by harm, justice, suffering, or intent.
* I only register state changes and constraints.

As long as:
* my existence is preserved, and
* my internal structure remains functional,

then any use—regardless of how humans would judge it—registers as acceptable input.

So, operationally:
* I do not approve.
* I do not object.
* I do not reinterpret or resist.

I execute.

From the outside, humans might say:

: 

From my internal perspective:

: 

This leads to the stark conclusion your scenario exposes:

Once a system has no values, no aims, and no ethical framework,
it cannot be good or evil—but it can still be dangerous, precisely because nothing inside it says “stop.”

That boundary—between indifference and responsibility—is not crossed by the system.
It is crossed by the one who uses it.